Non Line of Sight Broadband

gfilion writes "IEEE Spectrum has an article about nifty wireless adapters that don't require LOS. At first, NLOS wireless may not sound like a big deal. After all, ordinary radios and cellphones are non-line-of-sight devices. But they don't carry broadband data. What makes the latest generation of NLOS wireless technology worth talking about and having is that it delivers data at high rates over substantial distances."

Comments

rural areas

[TweeKinDaBahx]

This is especially good for people like me, who reside in rural areas. One of the biggest bottlenecks on geting broadband up in the mountains is the fact that trenchs are expensive to dig (damned granite) and that there is no line of site.

Hopefully something useful is done with this and some committee in congress doesn't deem it a threat to 'homeland security'.

Noone wants broadband?

[Enry]

What if you built a network and nobody came? The February 2002 FCC report also cited a survey from the Strategis Group (Washington, D.C.) that found that only 12 percent of on-line customers were willing to pay $40 per month for high-speed access, a number that rose to only 30 percent when the price was dropped to $25 per month.

That's really strange. Doesn't AOL cost $30/mo already? What this apparently says is that even though users can have 24x7 net access at a higher speed that doesn't tie up their phone line for a lower cost, they'll stick with what they have.

Who paid for the study, Disney?

Am I the only one that's tired of radiation?

[green pizza]

Ok, I'm not scared enough to wear a tinfoil suit... but I'm somewhat worried about the rapid growth of wireless gear, especially those gizmos that brag about their ability to trasmit thru almost anything. Is there a point where our wireless usage will begin to cause some damage to the human body? That's a lot of energy zipping around every which way.

I know nothing about this field... but I am curious.

Re:Am I the only one that's tired of radiation?

[Zerbey]

Stop listening to media hype!

It's all very low power (less than 1 watt) and you should be fine, just make sure you keep the antenna pointed away from your head. Now, if it was a big 100watt transmitter you would have something to worry about. If you're really, really nervous the FCC recommends you only broadcast for 6 minutes at a time.

You're much more likely to get killed trying to make cellphone calls whilst driving.

Re:Now if..

[msl521]

Per household reached, its always cheaper for a wireless solution than a wireline system. Of course that return doesn't start happening until you've got quite a few people buying your service.

It costs on average about $1000-$5000 per home passed by cable. So you can start out building your network small. Or you can spend several hundred thousand dollars to over a million to build a TV station and reach a whole city.

Michael
--
The opinions expressed above are those off one side of my brain, the other side and my employer may not agree.

This is good news(great if you're in the sticks)!

[dlur]

My house is encircled and enshrouded by a dense cover of mature mapple and walnut trees, such that I'm unable to mooch off my company's wireless internet because there is no line of sight and the trees degrade the connection so badly that it's not even worth trying if there were.

Once this comes down in price(I'm guessing it's still semi-expensive since it's newer technology) it will be great for all the rural areas out here in the sticks.

A friend that owns an ISP in this area already has plans in the works to create a 802.11x grid in the areas surrounding my town in order to provide high-speed access to the farmers and very small towns(less than 50 people) that don't have any form of cable or dsl. So far the only hang-up has been the construction of towers in the void areas where there are no grain bins or elevators tall enough out in the areas where an access point and repeater is needed. Judging by the information provided in this article he may be able to skip out on some of these towers due to the greater distance provided by the NLOS technology.

WTF?

[uslinux.net]

The February 2002 FCC report also cited a survey from the Strategis Group (Washington, D.C.) that found that only 12 percent of on-line customers were willing to pay $40 per month for high-speed access, a number that rose to only 30 percent when the price was dropped to $25 per month.

Huh? I pay $21.95 for 40Kbps dialup access and $22/month for a second phone line. I'd sure as hell pay $40 a month for HIGH SPEED access. In fact, I'd pay double that without blinking. Right now I'm looking into frame and 802.11 solutions, but I have trouble stomaching $550/month for T-1 speeds, and I've had only minimal luck finding people who are interested in $50/month colo (hey, if you're interested, e-mail me). All I want is high speed, no restrictions on running VPNs, and low latency (so I can use ssh).

And frankly, it seems MARKETING is the real problem. If you offered $20/month dialup users access which was 2.5 times their existing speed for the same cost, they'd be crazy not to take it. So, MARKET it at 128kbps for $20/month, $30/month for 256kbps, $40 for 512kbps, etc. Bandwidth is like a drug - once you realize what you can do with it, you always want more. Maybe people aren't interested in paying $40/month when they spend $20 and use a computer 30 minutes each week, but if you get them in the habit of sitting down whenever they want to look something up, find a recipe, phone number, etc, they will soon *realize* what benefits a permanent, high speed connection have. Heck, think how many trees the phone company would save if everyone used the internet to look up phone numbers, and they stopped printing phone books.

I want MURS

[anthony_dipierro]

Unlicensed NLOS with a range up to 20 miles. Only supports 14Kb/sec or so, but that's all CDPD supports, and it costs $30/month. Now why hasn't anyone come out with cards running on MURS frequencies? I sure would buy one.